On 11/23/15, Dave Kemper <saint.s...@gmail.com> wrote:
> groff_char does seem to address this issue regarding other glyphs. It
> says, "Entries marked with `***' denote glyphs for mathematical
> purposes (mainly used for DVI output). Normally, such glyphs have
> metrics which make them unusable in normal text." This seems to
> correlate with what you said above about the \[{no,+-,mu,di}] glyphs.
> Thus, it seems to me that were those four glyphs marked with ***, the
> purpose of their "text variant" versions would be deducible.
>
> If my supposition above is correct, I'll create a patch to add the ***
> marker to the four glyphs in question.
I was finally going to do this but hit a snag: it turns out commit
07a6233adeb476611f7a286295935cbbf6b9cbbd ("complete notes in tables,"
done by Bernd Warken) removed the *** marker from all rows that
previously contained it, while leaving the explanatory text of what
the marker signifies.
If the marker was meant to be removed from all rows, the text
explaining the marker should also be removed. It seems more likely,
though, that these markers were erroneously removed during the rather
extensive changes introduced in this commit -- surely the point about
the font metrics for these glyphs remains true. Bernd?
